And THIS is how cops loose the respect of the people

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Yes accidents will happen
And I dont think many people would begrudge them that.
But
When things happen that seriously injure or kill people. And its undeniably obvious that the officer screwed up. All any of us want is for that person have to man up and face the same consequences that we would have to make.

 

And I telling you it doesn't work that way, theres no answer here you're going to like. Some cops are valuable community assets and it doest serve the public's interest to fire them in every case.

A Sgt I used to work for killed 1 & put 1 in a wheelchair responding to an emergency call.. he was at fault. During his 15 year career he received medals of valor  for saving lives, real dramatic burning building stuff that earned him the title "hero", twice. He was also recognized as of the nations leading experts in crimes related the occult, hes been on loan to the FBI, ATF as well as dozens of other depts and was responsible for putting away the type of criminal you pray never comes into contact with anyone you know / care about.

This was his 1st duty related accident in 12 years.

It was decided he shouldn't be fired and the courts allowed the dept to handle it administratively; he was demoted (loss $$), rotated to a desk while on probation for 9 months, and received 30 days off without pay. Last I knew was being sued for every penny he had, he was punished.

Lots of people out there can be arrested for some cheap poop, charged, or wipe out a few people in a crosswalk, receive probation and have no worries about losing their career as a result, why should cops be so drastically different? they swore to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free.

[Fishu]

We're talking about the cops who injure people when they're NOT on a call. It is completely understandable that accidents do happen for the cops, but not when the leading cause of an accident was due to recklessness of a cop.

Everyone is abided by the traffic laws; When a cop is not on a call he's expected to follow the same rules in the traffic as the rest of us. In the case of an accident, where the driver was in violation of the law, the background of a person can't be a reason to not punish reckless driving. The background could be used to mitigate the punishment, but it should not be a "jail free" card. There are lots of people out there, not just the cops, who's done alot of good. It shouldn't be the privilege of the privileged alone.

The cop in Marine's post was on a call when the accident happened. In the light of the post, if nothing crucial was left out that lead to the punishment, the cop shouldn't been punished. He was following the law and was not an example of a reckless cop, he and the victim had tough luck. Those things do happen and it's always very unfortunate. However, reckless driving when not on a call is inexcusable, especially for an officer who's duty is to defend the law.

The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by Fishu
We're talking about the cops who injure people when they're NOT on a call. It is completely understandable that accidents do happen for the cops, but not when the leading cause of an accident was due to recklessness of a cop.

Everyone is abided by the traffic laws; When a cop is not on a call he's expected to follow the same rules in the traffic as the rest of us. In the case of an accident, where the driver was in violation of the law, the background of a person can't be a reason to not punish reckless driving. The background could be used to mitigate the punishment, but it should not be a "jail free" card. There are lots of people out there, not just the cops, who's done alot of good. It shouldn't be the privilege of the privileged alone.

The cop in Marine's post was on a call when the accident happened. In the light of the post, if nothing crucial was left out that lead to the punishment, the cop shouldn't been punished. He was following the law and was not an example of a reckless cop, he and the victim had tough luck. Those things do happen and it's always very unfortunate. However, reckless driving when not on a call is inexcusable, especially for an officer who's duty is to defend the law.

The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?

On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law..  I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.

Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.

A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.

Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.

Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.

[john9001]

Originally posted by x0847Marine

as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.

A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up,
 

let me give you a clue, the job of a cop, what we pay them for, is to protect the citizens, or as you call them "outsiders", not to kill the citizens,

you don't like the job , get a different one.

[Halo]

Eloquent presentation, Drediock.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
And I telling you it doesn't work that way, theres no answer here you're going to like. Some cops are valuable community assets and it doest serve the public's interest to fire them in every case.

A Sgt I used to work for killed 1 & put 1 in a wheelchair responding to an emergency call.. he was at fault. During his 15 year career he received medals of valor  for saving lives, real dramatic burning building stuff that earned him the title "hero", twice. He was also recognized as of the nations leading experts in crimes related the occult, hes been on loan to the FBI, ATF as well as dozens of other depts and was responsible for putting away the type of criminal you pray never comes into contact with anyone you know / care about.

This was his 1st duty related accident in 12 years.

It was decided he shouldn't be fired and the courts allowed the dept to handle it administratively; he was demoted (loss $$), rotated to a desk while on probation for 9 months, and received 30 days off without pay. Last I knew was being sued for every penny he had, he was punished.

Lots of people out there can be arrested for some cheap poop, charged, or wipe out a few people in a crosswalk, receive probation and have no worries about losing their career as a result, why should cops be so drastically different? they swore to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free.

I never once said to fire them.
Just give the guy the same summons/charges we would get.
Most people wouldn't necessarily be fired either.
But we would have to  accept the summons/charges and go through the due process.

How much of a hero one is or was is irrelevant
Its supposed to be equal justice under the law.
Not equal justice cept for those that are a little more equal then others

In your case its a different story. he was on a call.
So really we're talking apples and oranges
I have no problem with the outcome in THAT instance.
When your on an emergency call yea. Things can happen.
When your not.
Sorry but there is no excuse and no room for that kind of "mistake"
When your not on a call. You should be just as reasonable , and just as accountable as the rest of us.
Or none of us should be reasonable  or accountable either.

Anything less places you above the law.
And your not.

but still by your "to uphold the law, not be "poop happens" mistake free. "argument
Then neither should the rest of us be when someone is maimed or killed
After all  we arent mistake free either.

I want to be clear. This isnt a rant against cops per se. I wholly support cops. And when things happen during the course of an emergency. I can understand. I think most people can.
My beef is when NOT on an emergency call. Again I will site the Governor, and the two girls.
In neither instance was there an "emergency situation"

In those instances there simply is no excuse
and the public has every right to be critical and cry foul in those instances.
And in those instances Cops need to understand it IS NOT an attack on cops in their entirety. But on the individual cop/s in question.
Because we are outraged when things like this happen just like we are outraged when Joe Shmo does them

And therein lies the problem.
A lot of cops. (generally speaking) take it as an attack on the force as a whole whenever a compliant is voiced about an individual.
And that ticks people off and thats how respect is lost  because more often then not that isnt the case at all.
The complaint is usually about one specific cop in particular.

In this instance the public has a problem with a series of incidents that involved officers NOT on an emergency call. Incidents where the ones in question were clearly in the wrong.
Yet we get this clown spokes person coming out in press conferences swearing the ones in question did nothing wrong and stand by them 100%. when everyone KNOWS its a crock. So people howl a that.
So what happens These troopers on the board get all pissed off cause they think the entire force is  being attacked rather then just the ones in question and the idiot spokes person.
So they decide they are going to fight back and take it out on everyone.

Thats BS. And thats the kind of thing that causes the people to cry out about the force as a whole.
Al they had to do was recognize that one of their own screwed up.
That's all the spokes person had to do was say "Hey, he screwed up and a summons will be issued and disciplinary actions will be taken." from the get go.

Woulda been end of story. No public outcry. no media criticism cept for maybe that particular officer. and that woulda been it. It would have in effect neutered the entire situation
But no. They couldn't do that. And in not doing that they bring about the very thing they are ticked off about.

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law..  I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.

Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.

A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.

Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.

Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.

Then I'd have to say that law. that special bill lof rights. Is in dire need of being rewritten

"A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever"

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck  etc etc.

What your discribing then is legalised rug sweeping and coverupping LOL

Sorry, you shoudnt get a free pass just for being on duty

[DREDIOCK]

Ok. so explian to me how this officers "special bill of rights"
Applies here

"Corzine, late for a meeting between radio host Don Imus and the Rutgers women's basketball team, was not wearing a seat belt as he rode in the front seat.

According to an Associated Press survey of travel policies nationwide, governors' drivers - who are state law enforcement officers - are expected to obey traffic and safety laws and not to speed or use warning lights just because their bosses are running late or want to get somewhere quicker"

"Officials in several states reported having no written policy on gubernatorial transport, with some saying they preferred that their executive protection unit have discretion while driving the governor. Some, citing security concerns, would not discuss transport protocol. No state agreed to share its complete policy.

In New Jersey, members of the governor's executive protection unit are trained to increase speed and activate flashing lights when necessary, although they are expected to obey traffic laws in non-emergencies, according to State Police Superintendent Col. Rick Fuentes."

And whats this guys excuse?
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770503058
"State Police union leader David Jones said more motorists have been confrontational during traffic stops since Carton, and then Gannett New Jersey newspapers, publicized the chatter about stepped-up ticket writing, which anonymous posters discussed on a password-protected message board for union members.

Jones held a paper with Carton's home information in front of him for the duration of his remarks.

"I'm going to release the names and addresses of these people and then their sponsors, and all of the car dealerships and everybody else that sponsors that show is going to have to deal with the reality that they're putting public servants and the public in general in harm's way," Jones said.

He said there is no ticket-writing campaign occurring and threatened to "crush" the people who leaked the anonymous posts to the media."

He says there isnt. But the fact remains its happening

[M36]

The badge carries a responsibility. If we can't trust the holder of the badge to follow the law, then why should we?

Fishu, are all cops irresponsible and are there any officers that you do trust?
Just one somewhere maybe?

[AKIron]

Human nature is defensive. I have little doubt that cops often feel unappreciated by the public but do have doubt that there is any organized effort to retaliate against a perceived slight.

[rpm]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
Depends on what standard, like it or not police officers are looked upon as public assets. To hire 3 cops you need 100 applicants, then theres the academy / training and all that.. it takes a lot of tax payer dollars to put a cop on the street.

Then there's the officer in question, the DAs and courts take into consideration how many lives s/hes saved, bad guys put in prison and the over all record (value) of that officer... there are times, like with traffic collisions, "they" decide although the officer was a fault it wouldn't be in the communities best interest to fire him / her.

Cops running into people is the cost of doing business sometimes, its recognized that officers do a lot of driving, emergency and otherwise, and over the course of a 20 year career accidents will happen. Its a tough business and bad things happen to good cops.

This doest mean there's no punishment, when courts allow depts to handle cases administratively guys can get MONTHS off, demoted, re assigned... they pay for it, just not the way some people in the civilian world would like.

That is completely and totally wrong. Are the victims and their families suppossed to feel better because they were the "cost of doing business"? That's the most ludicrous statement I've ever read.

Just because their buddies will give them "professional courtesy" does not mean thay are not responsable for their actions. A vacation from work is not punishment. Oh, the poor guy has to work at WalMart for 2 months. How horrid!!

Cops are not "special citizens".

Bad things happen to good truck drivers, too. They get no special treatment or consideration for the 1000's of lives they supported delivering their loads everyday spending weeks at a time away from their families.

[AWwrgwy]

Police Chief in Wisconcin


I think it's more a problem of the "cover up" than the actual incedent.  Put the officer on administrative leave or somthing for a few days and problem solved.  

Think of some other jobs where someone screws up and everything's fine, no punishment.  If this happened in a delivery truck, would the company let it go?




wrngway

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by rpm
That is completely and totally wrong. Are the victims and their families suppossed to feel better because they were the "cost of doing business"? That's the most ludicrous statement I've ever read.

Just because their buddies will give them "professional courtesy" does not mean thay are not responsable for their actions. A vacation from work is not punishment. Oh, the poor guy has to work at WalMart for 2 months. How horrid!!

Cops are not "special citizens".

Bad things happen to good truck drivers, too. They get no special treatment or consideration for the 1000's of lives they supported delivering their loads everyday spending weeks at a time away from their families.

Nobody said cops are "special citizens" (they are sworn public servants), but they do have their own rights... like it or not; AB301 in Ca. Professional courtesy, 99% of the time, is using ones discretion not to cite a fellow officer, "professional consideration" is what cops might get from the DA / courts.

Truck drivers?, it doesn't take 100 applicants to hire 3 truck drivers, call a truck driver next time a burglar breaks into your home, or some cluck punks you in front of your girl and jacks your ride... maybe the value of a cop will become clearer.

A truck driver kills someone in an accident, his / her driving & criminal record will be taken into account, same with cops...  cops who saved lives and catch killers for a living have these facts considered (see: professional consideration above)

There are a-lot more things than the "cost of doing business" that I promise you wont like... look into asset seizure, but if you'd like to me to sugar coat reality so its more palatable.. LMK. I can give you the nice for public consumption version.

People can die when a good cop makes a bad mistake because thats the nature of the business.. nobody can be perfect all of the time.

[Maverick]

Things are not uniform all the way across the country. One of the lessons that was taught in the academy was comparative operations. Once you cross the Mississippi things are way different from the Western side of the country. Graft, corruption, "favors" are far more prevalent there. Looking at N.O. and Chicago are pretty good examples. Things go on there that would be sensational news on the West coast or just in the West period. I'm not saying it's good, it's just what I was told and has been confirmed by observation.

As far as "professional courtesy" is concerned it is also different. I was cited for speeding by a trooper in my home state. I deserved the ticket and paid it. No big deal at all. I've also cited other Officers when I felt it was appropriate and even filed a complaint against a Federal Agent as well as writing him a ticket. I've let others go and I've let plain old joe citizen go at times. Attitude counts a lot at times. If you wanted to bite my bellybutton and use your "freedom of speech" to abuse me I was hardly likely to hand out a warning. Someone who said yep they screwed up and were sorry was a candidate for a warning, even when I was a Motor. I gave some latitude for the few "adult" drivers I found.

A prime example of "courtesy" between Prosecutors (for Superior Court) and Cops is this. In Arizona it is a felony to commit an assault on a Peace Officer (or Prosecutor). The statute does not have an injury classification, it just states that if you assault them you are prosecuted for a felony. When I was still working, the prosecutors office had a set "unwritten" standard that if the Cop did not get injured sufficiently admitted to the hospital for at least overnight there would be no prosecution for aggravated assault (the felony charge) as long as there was no knife or gun involved. We had folks get broken bones and other injuries that cost them time off work, sometimes significant time, and the prosecutors office would not prosecute for the assault. They remanded it to misdemeanor court. It didn't matter that the Officer arrested the suspect for the felony, the prosecutors office refused to file on it at court or take it to a grand jury.

Later on, one of the prosecutors got spit upon by a defendant at court and of course filed the felony.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
On call or not, its the idea of being "on duty", cops make observations, not related to calls, that might require some emergency type driving. Police officers have a bill of rights all their own that don't apply to you, in Cali its "AB301 rights". Lawmakers have recognized that cops are in a tough business, stuff happens and those sworn to protect others receive special considerations that are written into law..  I'm sorry you guys don't like it, but that's reality.

Reckless or untrustworthy officers usually get washed out, fired or run off relatively quickly in this business, long before they screw up and get in an unfortunate traffic accident, which as Ive already stated is sometimes chalked up as the cost of doing police business... even when people get killed. Might seem callous, but this is a life and death profession.

A lot of what outsiders think is some type of cover up, under the rug sweeping, or whatever.. has a lot to do with the officers additional rights, due process, and long standing legal precedents and understandings between the courts / DAs / local cities and the nature of police business.

Trying to explain to some of you guys how exactly things of this type work, is like trying to teach law on a BBS.. there are just too many rules, laws, regulations, policies, procedures and such to cover... which also happen to differ from state to state.

Suffice it to say some you guys just dont like the way it is, and no explanation is going to change that.

My neighbor growing up is a Chief of two cities in Metro Detroit, and his son (my best friend) is a SWAT officer in another city and now works in conjunction with the DEA.   Cops DO and will CONTINUE "to stick together".   Saying otherwise, is hilarious.   I'm not an "outsider", funny you use that term.